and please stop the pseudo name calling as well as the snarky comments.

Pay me £10,000 or so for an calibrated oscilloscope, and I'll look into it. And please stop repeating what others say, go and listen for yourself.

If you think all amps sound the same.... do you have hearing damage? Even when switching over a few power amplifiers there was a difference, the NAD 25W amp struggled in the bass region, it was pretty bloaty. Small room, quite efficent, easy to drive speakers.

So that knackers your amp sounds the same and only need 3W of power delusions.

Why not show some evidence of your own claims if you are going to request that of others. With all the manufactures you have listed above could you please list what sound signature each unit has specifically. Not trying to put you on the spot here. But I'm honestly curious as to what the sound signature differences are between each unit.

No difference in sound. As long as your AVR operates with enough power not to clip, then going to separates would simply cost more and add complexity to the system. Most external amplifiers are purchased because they are wanted, not because they are needed.

I do not agree with this position or the blanket statement that there is no difference between an integrated AVR and separates.

In a couple words - - separation and clarity are the two main advantages that I have experienced in using "separates." Multichannel SACD's sound fantastic with better separation compared to using the Pioneer SC65 alone. (This was also an unsolicited observation from a friend when we listened to a recent 5.1 SACD CD.) There is also more "punch" to Dolby and DTS movie soundtracks.

Lastly - - I am listening at lower volumes for satellite TV and music. Especially at night - - and that has made my girlfriend very happy!

O.K. - - it's not a blind test and all the purists/scientists in the world can talk about the necessity to validate the findings and that there is no appreciable difference between an integrated AVR and separates.

For me, having separates has been worth every penny. When I need to update my "Preamp" - - it will be an easy conversion. The Wyred MMC 7.1 will be an integral part of my HT and music setup for a long, long time. IMHO.

Let me ask a question regarding the equipment reviews published by Stereophile Magazine. I skim over them as I don't have any sort of background to understand them. There is usually a number of charts/ graphs displayed in their reviews. I gather that from the review process that the equipment is put through that in fact they all have their own profile in terms of what the charts/graphs look like. Could this mean that this potentially translates into a different sound, sound signature, etc. for audio equipment? For example, two Amps have different charts/graphs that were produced through a testing and evaluation process. Could this mean that they sound different ? May be our hearing is such that we can't in many cases identify the sound differences but maybe they are there at least on paper anyways. Again, I was a liberal arts major and not a tech/audio savy person so I am just asking some questions that I am thinking about as I read through this discussion. Have a great weekend one and all...baseball starts up again today!

In a couple words - - separation and clarity are the two main advantages that I have experienced in using "separates." Multichannel SACD's sound fantastic with better separation compared to using the Pioneer SC65 alone. (This was also an unsolicited observation from a friend when we listened to a recent 5.1 SACD CD.) There is also more "punch" to Dolby and DTS movie soundtracks.

Lastly - - I am listening at lower volumes for satellite TV and music. Especially at night - - and that has made my girlfriend very happy!

O.K. - - it's not a blind test and all the purists/scientists in the world can talk about the necessity to validate the findings and that there is no appreciable difference between an integrated AVR and separates.

For me, having separates has been worth every penny. When I need to update my "Preamp" - - it will be an easy conversion. The Wyred MMC 7.1 will be an integral part of my HT and music setup for a long, long time. IMHO.

I guess I don't have to explain to you the value of your sighted listening experience. I stand by what I said. I've actually done the blind tests.

Let me ask a question regarding the equipment reviews published by Stereophile Magazine. I skim over them as I don't have any sort of background to understand them. There is usually a number of charts/ graphs displayed in their reviews. I gather that from the review process that the equipment is put through that in fact they all have their own profile in terms of what the charts/graphs look like. Could this mean that this potentially translates into a different sound, sound signature, etc. for audio equipment? For example, two Amps have different charts/graphs that were produced through a testing and evaluation process. Could this mean that they sound different ? May be our hearing is such that we can't in many cases identify the sound differences but maybe they are there at least on paper anyways. Again, I was a liberal arts major and not a tech/audio savy person so I am just asking some questions that I am thinking about as I read through this discussion. Have a great weekend one and all...baseball starts up again today!

There are two possibilities. One, the differences between the two are measurable but inaudible. This is usually the situation as extremely sensitive equipment can detect differences even dogs couldn't hear.

Second, as the great Bob Carver has said, he can make his amplifier sound like anything he wants. If he doesn't want a flat frequency response, he can modify the design. It would be a faulty amplifier in the sense it is changing the signal from the source, but it could be designed to sound different enough that you could hear a difference.

Let me ask a question regarding the equipment reviews published by Stereophile Magazine. I skim over them as I don't have any sort of background to understand them. There is usually a number of charts/ graphs displayed in their reviews. I gather that from the review process that the equipment is put through that in fact they all have their own profile in terms of what the charts/graphs look like. Could this mean that this potentially translates into a different sound, sound signature, etc. for audio equipment? For example, two Amps have different charts/graphs that were produced through a testing and evaluation process. Could this mean that they sound different ? May be our hearing is such that we can't in many cases identify the sound differences but maybe they are there at least on paper anyways. Again, I was a liberal arts major and not a tech/audio savy person so I am just asking some questions that I am thinking about as I read through this discussion. Have a great weekend one and all...baseball starts up again today!

There are some sonic differences between some amplifiers but those amplifiers are not usually the ones that are being discussed in this forum. Not all differences in measurements are audible. The test equipment Stereophile uses is more sensitive than your hearing or mine so virtually every amplifier will have different measurements. Audible differences between various amplifiers, on the other hand, are pretty rare.

The only reliable way to determine audible differences is with bias controlled listening and audio magazines don't do bias controlled listening. Not only is it difficult to do but it would destroy magazine sales if they printed the results since it belies the content of that prose.

Interestingly, Stereophile did do a decent bias controlled test once at an audio show and discovered a barely statistically significant audible difference between two amplifiers. One was a solid state amp and the other was a high end tube amp. Those of us with experience in bias controlled comparisons often find obvious audible differences between solid state gear and tube gear so it is a credit to that manufacturer that their product was just barely differentiated from solid state in the test.

I once did an amplifier comparison between a solid state amp and a tube amp and had a result of no audible difference. Every other similar comparison had a statistically significant audible difference.

Audiophiles hate the concept of bias controlled testing because it appears to attack their egos by showing that audio electronics are not a meaningful way to improve sound quality. I was one of them but cured myself of it by going through the effort of conducting the tests. You can read their comments in the posts above this one and elsewhere. "Trust your ears," "You have impaired hearing," "the blind bias controlled tests are flawed." We hear it all the time. What they fail to accept is the logical conclusion that if a listener can't distinguish the sound of one unit from another without knowing which is which, then there is no audible difference. If the differences exist in a sighted test then they must be caused by hearing bias not by anything in the equipment. It is simply illogical to believe otherwise. Lots of illogical thinking in audio.

Pay me £10,000 or so for an calibrated oscilloscope, and I'll look into it. And please stop repeating what others say, go and listen for yourself.

If you think all amps sound the same.... do you have hearing damage? Even when switching over a few power amplifiers there was a difference, the NAD 25W amp struggled in the bass region, it was pretty bloaty. Small room, quite efficent, easy to drive speakers.

So that knackers your amp sounds the same and only need 3W of power delusions.

for the third time can you please stop calling me names and posting snide and snarky comments? can you discuss like an adult?

and what makes you think i am repeating what others say?

do you know if i have done any of my own testing and research?

I think if you did just one proper dbt your eyes and ears would open up....and maybe humble you just a bit as well.

seperates, and high power amps and esoteric gear has its place, but i take issue with the bogus claims you make. i dont believe in fairy dust or unicorn farts. modern solid state gear is designed to such a standard that audible differences are not discernible. if you experienced so called "bloated bass" on one amp vs another, i challenge you to level match them and test them under double blind conditions.

one more condescending post i will start reporting you.. i have politely asked you 3 times now to cut it out. it serves no purpose.

Go ahead. All reason and thinking for yourself is lost. Where is your evidence to support YOUR OWN claim that all amps sound the same? Some other group doing testing? Nope. What do you own? How anyone can say the Roksan Kandy K1 sounds the same as a Arcam Alpha, hahaha. Deaf.

And like all people with group delusions, you want to silence opposing opinions.

You just aren't interested in someone else giving own opinion, you just want confirmation of your belief.

one more condescending post i will start reporting you.. i have politely asked you 3 times now to cut it out. it serves no purpose.

He's just trolling. He doesn't have the equipment he says, as most people with money don't act like children. Seriously, a Krell amp hooked up to $120 speakers? I put my money into an acoustically designed room where you CAN hear the difference, and of course, speakers.

Go ahead. All reason and thinking for yourself is lost. Where is your evidence to support YOUR OWN claim that all amps sound the same? Some other group doing testing? Nope. What do you own? How anyone can say the Roksan Kandy K1 sounds the same as a Arcam Alpha, hahaha. Deaf.

And like all people with group delusions, you want to silence opposing opinions.

You just aren't interested in someone else giving own opinion, you just want confirmation of your belief.

He's just trolling. He doesn't have the equipment he says, as most people with money don't act like children. Seriously, a Krell amp hooked up to $120 speakers? I put my money into an acoustically designed room where you CAN hear the difference, and of course, speakers.

typical...i suspected as much. hopefully others trying to learn can see through his antics.

I honestly believe nobody is going to post the end all to this, which has not been done, but tried countless times.. If your looking for something and found what you want, than you are happier than most. I feel sorry for the ones who believe and can't handle the fact that some hardware is just better, and most of time costs a hell of a lot more. For those who have capped and limited their mind by not wanting to believe there is better, or/and not willing to work for it, well good luck..

This subject certainly stirs up controversy. I think it would be great if avs forum sponsored an event to help put this matter to rest. It should be done in a typical home listening type room. There should be a few different pairs of speakers playing music with a lot of detail. Of course, the speakers should be known to be able to discern the detail within the recordings. It is my belief that the more detail in a track, the more possible it could be to be able to tell any audible difference between amps and or receivers. If such an event ever occurs, I'll be there. I know there have been previous double blind studies, but wouldn't it be great to actually attend one?

This subject certainly stirs up controversy. I think it would be great if avs forum sponsored an event to help put this matter to rest. It should be done in a typical home listening type room. There should be a few different pairs of speakers playing music with a lot of detail. Of course, the speakers should be known to be able to discern the detail within the recordings. It is my belief that the more detail in a track, the more possible it could be to be able to tell any audible difference between amps and or receivers. If such an event ever occurs, I'll be there. I know there have been previous double blind studies, but wouldn't it be great to actually attend one?

Their really is no need I've proved it to my self many times, its really not that hard to prove. Just compare a AB to D class amps which I did many times in my home. I'm happy to report I heard the changes to my hard to drive magnepan tympani speakers. This is in just simple stereo, so it was very easy to judge, no blind fold was needed!

Ok, here's what I did and the outcome.
I have an Onkyo TX nr717 which I believe is rated at 110 x 7. I run 2 pairs of really great near field passive Bookshelf monitors for my 2 front channels. I bought 2 two channel onkyo power amps rated at 75 per channel. I daisy chained them off the 2 front outs from my avr. Each of these amps weigh almost as much as my avr.
They sound amazing. I primarily listen to music so the better quality is really noticeable. For 5.2, I use the other avr channels. This is by no means big $ stuff, but together with my oppo and some decent ( mostly velodyne) subs, I have a system that didn't break the bank and sounds incredible. .

What I would have liked to have seen from this study is to have listener A and listener E take a break and then do 10 more tests. (A had 8 of his last 10 correct and listener E got his last 5 correct.)

What I'd like to try is to have a DB test with my system compared to a level matched cheap system. It seems to me that a person who is familiar with the nuances of their particular system would have a better opportunity to pick out differences.

It seems to me that a person who is familiar with the nuances of their particular system would have a better opportunity to pick out differences.

That's the only way its going to work at this level, with the good stuff. Its not as easy as picking black or white, you got to know that your looking for so when you find it you just don't pass it by..

Their really is no need I've proved it to my self many times, its really not that hard to prove. Just compare a AB to D class amps which I did many times in my home. I'm happy to report I heard the changes to my hard to drive magnepan tympani speakers. This is in just simple stereo, so it was very easy to judge, no blind fold was needed!

Okay, but you proved it to yourself. I'm saying to would be great to do what I suggested so people in both camps could attend. May be some attendees could hear a difference and some could not. May be everyone could or could not. It could help extinguish the fire that seems to be burning out of control. I have my theory but can not scientifically prove it. My theory is that there are some subtle to moderate to (in some rare instances) substantial differences in sound between amps and receivers. In some cases I think there are absolutely no discernible differences. just depends on the amps and associated equipment. I run a Mcintosh amp for my main L/R speakers. If I could hear for myself that it is sonically no better than a $300.00 receiver, I'd sell it tomorrow. Regretfully though, those blue meters sure are pretty.

Each of these amps weigh almost as much as my avr.
They sound amazing. I primarily listen to music so the better quality is really noticeable. For 5.2, I use the other avr channels. This is by no means big $ stuff, but together with my oppo and some decent ( mostly velodyne) subs, I have a system that didn't break the bank and sounds incredible. .

That's the point I made, balance what you like with your budget. Simple. Good for you! Some here think it's all in our heads, I can only assume some people have better hearing than others, what else could it be?